Reported by: Oahimire Omone Precious | Edited by: Oravbiere Osayomore Promise.
The Federal High Court in Abuja has postponed its judgment in a high-profile legal dispute within the African Democratic Congress (ADC), further prolonging uncertainty over the party’s leadership structure amid growing internal tensions.
The case, filed by House of Representatives member Leke Abejide, seeks to challenge the legitimacy of the appointments of former Senate President David Mark and former Osun State Governor Rauf Aregbesola as interim national chairman and national secretary of the ADC, respectively.
The matter, which was scheduled for judgment on Monday, could not proceed as planned due to the unavailability of the presiding judge, Justice Musa Liman, who was reportedly engaged in another official assignment. The court subsequently adjourned the delivery of judgment to April 14, 2026.
The suit, marked FHC/ABJ/CS/1637/2025, was instituted by Abejide on February 15, 2026. In the case, he named the ADC, its former national chairman Ralph Nwosu, David Mark, Rauf Aregbesola, and the Independent National Electoral Commission as defendants.
At the heart of the dispute is the July 2, 2025, leadership transition within the party, during which Nwosu stepped down and handed over leadership to Mark and Aregbesola at an event held at the Shehu Musa Yar’adua Centre in Abuja. Abejide is contesting the legality of that process, arguing that it did not comply with the provisions of the Electoral Act, 2022.
Through his counsel, Ibrahim Idris, Senior Advocate of Nigeria, Abejide is seeking multiple reliefs from the court. Among them is an order nullifying the transfer of leadership from Nwosu to the new interim executives, which he argues was carried out in violation of established legal and party procedures.
He is also requesting a perpetual injunction restraining Mark and Aregbesola from presenting themselves as national officers of the party, on the grounds that their appointments are unlawful, invalid, and of no legal effect. In addition, he is asking the court to restrain the Independent National Electoral Commission from recognising them in those capacities.
Abejide’s legal argument is partly anchored on Section 82 of the Electoral Act, 2022, which outlines procedures for party conventions, congresses, and leadership selection processes. He contends that the process through which the new leadership emerged did not meet the statutory requirements and therefore lacks legal validity.
Lawyers representing the defendants had earlier filed their responses opposing the suit, defending the legitimacy of the leadership transition and urging the court to dismiss the claims. Both parties adopted their written submissions and presented arguments during earlier proceedings, after which the court reserved judgment.
The case has attracted significant attention due to its implications for the ADC’s internal cohesion and broader political positioning ahead of future elections. The party, which has been undergoing restructuring efforts, has seen increasing activity and engagement as political actors explore alternative platforms in Nigeria’s evolving political landscape.
The involvement of prominent political figures such as David Mark and Rauf Aregbesola has further elevated the profile of the dispute. Both men have held significant public offices and bring considerable political influence to the party, making the outcome of the case particularly consequential.
Observers note that the court’s eventual decision could have far-reaching implications not only for the ADC’s leadership but also for its legal standing with the electoral commission and its preparedness for upcoming political activities.
For now, the adjournment extends the period of uncertainty within the party, as stakeholders await judicial clarification on the legitimacy of its current leadership arrangement. The ruling, now expected on April 14, is anticipated to provide direction on the legal and organisational future of the ADC.
As the case progresses, attention remains focused on the court’s interpretation of electoral law provisions and internal party governance procedures, both of which are central to resolving the dispute.
📩 Stone Reporters News | 🌍 stonereportersnews.com
✉️ info@stonereportersnews.com | 📘 Facebook: Stone Reporters News | 🐦 X (Twitter): @StoneReportNew | 📸 Instagram: @stonereportersnews
Add comment
Comments